Author Topic: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter  (Read 3877 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline newbie pa rin

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • DVD Addict
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • Hi, newbie here!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 19
Would the difference be that noticeable?
Where there is no vision, the people perish

Offline rascal101

  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,366
  • Naraniag nga aldaw kinyayo amin
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 41
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #1 on: Nov 06, 2006 at 10:19 AM »
It depends on what kind of set-up you have.

Offline MAtZTER

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,638
  • More POWER to your HT! literally ...
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #2 on: Nov 06, 2006 at 11:07 AM »
From my experiments:

HK has a 192/24 conversion if you use Dolby pro logic 3-5 speaker mode. Also heard a 192/24 converting CDP. IMO in all of the above, malinis tunog, but MANIPIS na.

My 96/24 converting CDP is just perfect for my listening taste.

Offline newbie pa rin

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • DVD Addict
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • Hi, newbie here!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #3 on: Nov 06, 2006 at 03:34 PM »
Thanks for all the replies.
I though mas mataas mas maganda.
It depends pa rin pala sa pandinig mo.
Where there is no vision, the people perish

Offline Superman

  • Trade Count: (+138)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,155
  • Master Showman Presents...
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 366
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #4 on: Nov 06, 2006 at 03:38 PM »
...and it also depends on the software you're playing...thanks! :D
Fyne|EAR|Hana|Technics|SAEC|Wiim|Western Electric|Audiolab|Acrolink|Oyaide|Oppo|Tellurium

Offline NadB

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 100
  • Music is Life!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #5 on: Dec 13, 2006 at 08:07 PM »
Need help.

what makes an external DAC better than the other?

what characteristics / specs / parameters makes an external DAC a good one?

I have two Philips DVP's..24/96 & 24/192 which I will use as CD transport.

I am contemplating which of the ff are better suited for my eqpt.

CAL Sigmna 2 DAC (Tube) 10 yrs old. - standard samplinmg lang daw.
Audio Alchemy - 16 bit, 8x OS daw.  7 yrs old yata.
Zhaolu 1.3 - napakahaba ng pila.

Pls advise.

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #6 on: Dec 13, 2006 at 11:02 PM »
If you use the Philips as a transport, neither its 24/92 and 24/192 DAC will matter.  Coz the player's DAC would be bypassed entirely.   ;D

High end commercial CD players and receivers already have excellent DACs and I often wonder what downstream gears costing above $100,000 could possibly reveal that makes outboard DACs like the dCS Delius, Purcell or Elgar mated to a dCS Verdi transport do what built-in DACS can't do to justify spending about $25,000 for them alone.  Only owners of these mega-buck systems can tell.  ;D

I am not familiar with the DACs you mentioned if they are anywhere near the revered dCS line.   You ask what makes an outboard DAC pressumably better than others, I could cite from what i've read that the $10,000 Delius uses an unconventional Ring DAC with 64x oversampling.  It has user selectible support for 16bit and 24-bit upsampling rates all the way from 44.1 khz to 192khz as well as single-bit DSD streams at 2.8mhz.  You can actually either upsample or downsample.   The dCS Purcell is an outboard upsampler  that can upsample from multi-bit PCM to single-bit DSD and vice versa via firewire connection to the Delius. And you have customization values for the dithering and noise shaping aspects as well.   In short, an outboard DAC should allow the user to custom- tailor the DAC performance that cannot be done with DACs in CD players except on a limitied range in a few really expensive ones. 

Upsampling and oversampling really won't yield better sonics in themselves unless the finest anti-aliasing and post-DAC filters are used - filters no mass produced CD players can afford to implement at their prices.   Then there is the over-hyped jitter issue which only the most incompetent DAC implementation can mess-up.  Ofcourse, outboard DACs should reclock more efficiently and intelligently than mass-produced CD players can.  But I would not put too much weight on the minute improvements in their reclocking to really matter in the analog domain.  But that's just me.

« Last Edit: Dec 13, 2006 at 11:10 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline ProtegeManiac

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • DVD Addict
  • ***
  • Posts: 531
  • Hi, I'm new here!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #7 on: Dec 14, 2006 at 10:23 AM »
Baka ibig sabihin pag sinabi mo na standard sampling ibig sabihin no up/oversampling 8)

analogy:
CD= Tuna
NOS=Sahimi, Tube Buffer=wasabi and soy sauce
Upsampling=Tuna misono with MSG
 ;D ;D ;D

Nice analogy :)

Offline NadB

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 100
  • Music is Life!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #8 on: Dec 14, 2006 at 01:06 PM »
Thanks mga Bros.  In fact WS 'mates like JackD201, Egay and fld share the same view.
Truly, there is only one path that leads to the Holy Grail of aural listening.
And as such, TIME brings all things to light from what wasn't there before to what there is right now.

Appreciate your generous feedback and encouragement.

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #9 on: Dec 14, 2006 at 01:54 PM »

There are consumer who prefer a non-sampling player because they want to hear unadulterated version of their CD disk.


My take is this.   Upsampling and oversampling are mathematical re-quantization operations and, unlike digital equalization, don't alter the digital contents of the CD.  So there's no adulteration or manipulation involved that would alter the reconstructed analog waveform.   What upsampling , oversampling or non-oversampling do is basically to extract the CD contents and reconstitute the analog waveform the bast way the designers know how.  There is no manipulation.  IOW upsampling, oversampling and Non oversampling are simply different ways to faithfully recover the analog waveform based on differing design philosophies.   One may be said to be better than others but even that is arguable from another percepective.  It all depends on the design implementation and execution.  So you can have both good and excellent oversampling or upsampling DACs as well as good and excellent non-oversampling DACs.  But regardless, oversampling and upsampling are not the same as adulterating or manipulating the dgital content.  In fact, non-oversampling DACs run a higher risk of altering and shaping the 22khz bandwidth of redbook CD if its anti-aliasing and post DAC filtering is not as steep and complex as required.   Or they can go filterless as is often the case and just let the humans ears do the filtering, but there's also the risk of modulating the analog signals with high frequency digital artifact noise.   ;D  But ofcourse, nothing that good design can't prevent.  I would tend to agree with some punduts that at a certain price range, non-oversampling filterless DAC can sound really great.  But because oversampling and upsampling as well as filtering use really complex circutiry and processing, the best sounding oversampling DACs like the dCS Delius, Purcell and Elgar are often beyond the financial reach of ordinary mortals.  ;D  Whether they are better than NOS DACs to justify the added cost, I'll leave to your taste and wallet. 
« Last Edit: Dec 14, 2006 at 02:19 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #10 on: Dec 18, 2006 at 02:23 PM »
It is really not the upsampling or oversampling that determines how good the reconstituted analog waveform will be.  Your quoted article fromArt Dudley is right.  These processes are purely mathematical techniques that inserts NOTHING to the original 44.1khz data.  The benefit comes from the filtering.  It's the filtering that makes them sound better in the right design.    Oversampling and upsamling are just mathematical techniques that allow for a more effective anti-aliasing or reconstruction filters to work and thus give a better recovered analog waveform. 

OTH, NOS can work just fine without any anti-aliasing filters and are essentially simpler to implement.  And I am really aghast that any NOS implementation would cost as much as a well designed oversampling system.  NOS are quite comon among DIY enthusiasts and 47 labs have taken a lot of flak for coming out with NOS Dacs using inexpensive parts and simpler designs at  exhorbitant prices.  Admittedly some of the best sounding systems come from the simplest electronics.  And NOS is the simplest DAC implementation.

Unfortunately, when you have a 44.1khz digital sample of a 22khz analog waveform, there's mirroring or aliasing above 22khz.  And this is what the anti-aliasing or reconstruction filters do - take out any digital artifact or aliasing noise in the DAC process.  NOS is based on the premise that the human ear can only hear up to 20khz and that any digital aliasing problems will be naturally filtered out by the human ear.  NOS design simply anchors its faith that the human ear can no longer resolve those noise.  So no reconstruction filters are needed, and thus, no oversampling or upsampling technique required.  Simple.   Does it sound better?, some say yes, some say no.   But for its relative cheaper implementation and price,  no one is really complaining.  But I would complain being asked $10,000 for a supposedly simpler and cheaper NOS DAC.  Seems to me like a rip off taking advantage of innocent buyers.   ;D   
 
« Last Edit: Dec 18, 2006 at 02:35 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #11 on: Dec 19, 2006 at 07:52 AM »
There are some DVD-As with 24/88.2 audio sampling. I have a few from the warner label   ;D
« Last Edit: Dec 19, 2006 at 07:54 AM by av_phile1 »

Offline Voltraizer

  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #12 on: Dec 19, 2006 at 09:31 AM »
There are some DVD-As with 24/88.2 audio sampling. I have a few from the warner label   ;D
i mean...players...esp cd players :D
technics sl1200ltd gold,,Passlabs X250.5,dynaudio C1, rogue  super99,charisma audio ref1 mc 

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #13 on: Dec 19, 2006 at 05:26 PM »
Oh I see.  But I think there are CD players with 24-bit DACs that oversamples 4x or 8x yielding exact multiples of 44.1khz, not just 88.2 or 2x. 
« Last Edit: Dec 19, 2006 at 05:28 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #14 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 08:47 AM »
Just for the info of everyone, oversampling and upsampling need not be a "this or that" proposition.  Digital players can do both.  The rotel rcd-06 has a Burr Brown 24/96 DAC that also oversamples 8x.  The 16/44.1 sample read from the disc is first upsampled to 24/96 before being fed to the DAC which oversamples it 8x .    I think many upscale 24/96 CD players implement this.   

Offline Voltraizer

  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #15 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 10:50 AM »
Just for the info of everyone, oversampling and upsampling need not be a "this or that" proposition.  Digital players can do both.  The rotel rcd-06 has a Burr Brown 24/96 DAC that also oversamples 8x.  The 16/44.1 sample read from the disc is first upsampled to 24/96 before being fed to the DAC which oversamples it 8x .    I think many upscale 24/96 CD players implement this.   
I think they are implementing the classic oversampling method using Burr-Brown DAC .
I saw in one article the phrase "24bit/96kHz sampling multi-level " DAC in the description of RCD-06.
Rotel is one company i consider that doesn't employ any marketing hypes in describing their product.
« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:04 AM by Voltraizer »
technics sl1200ltd gold,,Passlabs X250.5,dynaudio C1, rogue  super99,charisma audio ref1 mc 

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #16 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:04 AM »
Some high end CD player and outboard DACs use an upsampling circuitry before the DAC that upsamples a native 16/44.1 into 24/96 before going into the oversampling DAC.  The upsampled 16/44.1 data is seen as 24/96 by the DAC and oversamples it to 768khz. 

If i recall right, the dCS Purcell is an outboard upsampler than can upsample a native 16/44.1 to 24/192 up to DSD rates.    And this is fed to another outboard box, either the dCS Delius or Elgar for the DAC which also upsamples 64 times up to 2.8mhz or 3.0 mhz, depending on the input if its a multiple of 44.1khz or 48khz. 

« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:19 AM by av_phile1 »

Offline Voltraizer

  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #17 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:09 AM »
Some high end CD player and outboard DACs use an upsampling circuitry before the DAC that upsamples a native 16/44.1 into 24/96 before going into the oversampling DAC.  The upsampled 16/44.1 data is seen as 24/96 by the DAC and oversamples it to 768khz. 

If I recall right, the dCS Elgar is not a DAC but an Upsampler that can upsample a native 16/44.1 data 64 times to achieve DSD rates of 2.8mhz.  And this is fed to a separate box the dCS Delius which is  the DAC.   So in some implementation, upsampling and oversampling go together. 
I have read in some thread wherein DIYers substituting CS-8414 96kHz audio interface receiver in their DAC as substitute for the more expensive(but obsolete) CS-8412 receiver in making their non-oversampling DAC.
In the case of rotel RCD-06, I don't think they oversample it to 768kHz. It would be a good marketing ploy to advertize it as 24bit/768kHz upsampling player.  It is not 768 kHz.
« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:16 AM by Voltraizer »
technics sl1200ltd gold,,Passlabs X250.5,dynaudio C1, rogue  super99,charisma audio ref1 mc 

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #18 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:20 AM »
I corrected my post, it's not the elgar, but the purcell which is an upsampler.

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #19 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:23 AM »
In the case of rotel RCD-06, I don't think they oversample it to 768kHz. It would be a good marketing ploy to advertize it as 24bit/768kHz upsampling player.  It is not 768 kHz.

Well, its specs did read 8x oversampling.   

Here's an illustrative example of both upsampling and oversampling implemented together:
 
Upsampling in the Link DAC III is accomplished in a chip outside the DAC chip itself, while the oversampling is done inside the DAC chip. So, when the upsampling is engaged (a toggle on the back of the Link DAC III lets you turn on or turn off the upsampling), incoming 16/44.1 data are upsampled to 24/96. Then, the 24/96 data are fed into the DAC, where oversampling occurs. As far as the DAC chips are concerned, the incoming data are native 24/96 signals. Upsampling is for the purpose of actually creating more data, and the new data are computer representations of what the upsampling chip has interpolated from the native data. Oversampling is just for reducing noise and allowing the filters to more easily remove frequencies above 22 kHz so that you don't get "aliasing", which are false frequencies created from having too few samples.  In both cases though, the new digital information is computer generated as "best guesses".

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_7_2/msb-technology-link-dac-111-april-2000.html

The article did not state how much oversampling in done in the DAC chip, after being upsampled already.  But if I go by many oversampling DACs out there, 4x, 8x and 16x are quite common.   The dCS Purcell oversamples up to 64x to achieve DSD rates. 
« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 11:32 AM by av_phile1 »

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #20 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 12:08 PM »
I don't know how you interpret a 24/96 DAC that oversamples 8x.  .  My take is explained above as taking an 96khz input (upsampled from 44.1khz) and oversampled accdg to its rate.  If its 8x, then you get 768khz.  If 4x then you get half.  The article on the Link DAC III shows how upsampling and oversampling go together.  And the fact that the dCS Delius can accept a 24/96 or 24/192 input, whether upsampled from a Purcell or is native from a player, and further oversampled anywhere up to 64x suggest that the upsampling and oversampling technologies can be implemented together.

And yes, oversampling and upsampling are just mathematical guesswork that only increase the amount of data without improving on the native datastream itself.  As I said earlier, they are not meant to improve the data content. Oversampling and upsampling will not by themselves inprove the sound you hear.  The purpose is simply to allow for a smoother and efficient action by the reconstruction filters.  And a more efficient reconstruction filter can make the recovered analog waveform more faithful to the original with less digital aliasing noise than if there were no oversampling used.  NOS filterless DACs on the other hand don't need oversampling because they don't use reconstruction filters and rely solely on the human ear to filter out ultrasonic aliasing noise.  They are simpler to implement and work just fine.  I think the problem lies when some high bandwidth amps start to become unstable because of these ultrasonic signals that remain unfiltered at the player side. 

If you have a PC with Nero, Soundforge or some wav editing software, they usually have 44.1 and 48 conversion capability and can go as high as 96 or even 192.  See if your upsampled ripped CD track has increased noise.   Also you can use the spectograph in these software to "see" any difference.  If so, then go NOS. 
« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 12:20 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #21 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 01:45 PM »
The concept of smooth and slow roll-off digital  filters is less attractive a marketing hype than the use of upsampling or oversampling terms.  That's because you can easily see numbers 24/192 being higher than 16/44.1  Or 16 times oversampling over 4X oversampling.  You can't have any analogous quantification for filters.  And they're usually better described.   But in real terms, whether upsampled or oversampled, its the gentle and smooth reconstruction filters possible only with upsampled data that improve the sound of  Nyquist CD music on playback.

This paper concludes that the slow roll-off characteristic of upsampling digital filters is indeed responsible for the improved sound quality...

http://www.mlssa.com/pdf/Upsampling-theory-rev-2.pdf.

The digital boxcar reconstruction filters is essentially the culprit behind much of 16/44.1 music's harsh and often fatiguing quality.  The simple expedient of doubling the sampling rate eliminates much of the practical real-life problems spawned by the Nyquist theory.  Oversampling and upsampling are just mathematical means to achieve the goal of recovering the analog waveform as faithfully as possible.  And bacause such a technique allows for a gentler reconstruction filter to do its job, then better sound is achieved.  In a way its an additve process.  Increased sampling rate plus better filters = better sound.  Taken separately, neither results in better sound.  But together, they do.  Marketing hype just happens to focus on the sampling rate to attract the public as it can be better described on paper with numbers.   ;D


« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 02:11 PM by av_phile1 »

Offline Voltraizer

  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #22 on: Dec 20, 2006 at 03:06 PM »
T

This paper concludes that the slow roll-off characteristic of upsampling digital filters is indeed responsible for the improved sound quality...

http://www.mlssa.com/pdf/Upsampling-theory-rev-2.pdf.

reconstruction filter to do its job, then better sound is achieved.  In a way its an additve process.  Increased sampling rate plus better filters = better sound.  Taken separately, neither results in better sound.  But together, they do.  Marketing hype just happens to focus on the sampling rate to attract the public as it can be better described on paper with numbers.   ;D



Marketing strategists are very good in cloaking the real nature of their product.
In numerical terms, 44.1 x 2 is 88.2 and not 96. Simple mathematics. Are you saying they use 96 because it sounds good than 88.2.
If you remember before, they marketed a new programming database language at that time('85?) where the latest computer is AT type. They call it DBASEII when in fact there's no Dbase1. They called their company "ASTON-TATE" because it sounds good and it does ring a bell but  no such partnership named ashton and tate ever existed. It's just the name of the new company created. Sales of the sofware skyrocketed. Naging successful .parang sine nagkaruon ng DBaseIII, DBASE III+, and DBASe IV.
Me kalaban pa Foxbase +, ++, Clipper 5 etc.
In the same manner , you are quoting a theory on upsampling. Their claim  is at best good on paper. What
really happens in actual practice depends on company to company philosophical approach.  We call it reality or practical application as against theory on paper.
In fact, a century old theory on playing golf say that it is best to use your left hand as the dominant factor in hitting the golfball. The first right handed golf player to defy this theory yet became the world champion is Seve Ballesteros.
We focus on substance where it counts most. What 'improvement' means to consumer is the object of attack by the marketing designer.  They won't produce DVD-a player if most of your music collection in your libraries are CDs.Few sales would mean closedown of the company. No wonder the popularity of IPOD-MP3 is very evident where many consumer resorted to  using softwares to compress their CD files to MP3. But what about the quality. To most consumer, CD have good quality sound already .. So logically, improving the sound of the original CD is the best way to go for most company.
Call it Upsampling , Oversampling , standard sampling whatever works for them ,fine. If  the theory is correct.In comparing dif ferent brand of processor], All CDplayer labeled 24bit/192khz using the same brand of DAC or filters should sound the same.In reality,no .they all have thier own kind of sonic improvement or signature sound implanted in the CDP or processor.  And upsampling is  software based activity whereby software designers are tasked to improve on the quality of the sound  reproduction of CD recording. The goal of recovering the analog waveform is just a beautiful phrase to the ears of programmer to programmer who is tasked to make the best guesswork they could concoct . The ART of upsampling is still hidden in the source code compiled in machine language. 8)
« Last Edit: Dec 20, 2006 at 09:48 PM by Voltraizer »
technics sl1200ltd gold,,Passlabs X250.5,dynaudio C1, rogue  super99,charisma audio ref1 mc 

Offline rnb_zounds

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Dig my Rhythm and Blues!!!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #23 on: Dec 29, 2006 at 05:34 PM »

Well in the world of computing this is like the Megahertz or Gigahertz Myth. Higher clock speed does not necessarily mean faster computers. More instructions per cycle is the same (though may have better effect). But taken together, yes sir! you get faster computers indeed. Witness Intel's Core 2 Duo replacing the Hyperthreading Pentium 4 and Pentium D Gigahertz monsters and even beating AMD's Athlon 64X2.  :o  Intel before was using the marketing hype of higher gigahertz = faster computers.  :P Because of this fiasco, the Pentium name sounds crappy today.  :-[

Digital music is a bit like a program compiled for execution in a certain architecture. Encoded with it is the limitation of the architecture it is written for. You can execute it faster with a better upgraded processor, give it more memory, and still, the limitation of the original compiled source is there.

Offline AlvinladeN

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Collector
  • **
  • Posts: 320
  • Hi, I'm new here!
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #24 on: Dec 29, 2006 at 11:58 PM »
sorry for the newb question but i just wanna ask that if your reciever supports 192khz/24bit on all channels(this is what is written on my receiver's manual) does it mean that it will convert all sources into 192khz/24bit ?

Offline alexg

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • DVD Addict
  • ***
  • Posts: 788
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #25 on: Jan 01, 2007 at 10:42 PM »
Upsampling and oversampling depends on the way the system mathematically "fill in the blanks."

I am more concerned with jitter correction than upsampling (I use a NOS DAC, sounds better than my oversampling CD player).

As in any source of music, the quality of software also affect the playback. Compare and Chesky CD to a Viva CD!

Just my $0.02.
I went fishing the other day, and I caught a BIG ONE!

Offline av_phile1

  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • PinoyDVD Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,597
  • Cheers from a movie and music lover
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter vs 96kHz/24-bit D/A converter
« Reply #26 on: Jan 06, 2007 at 11:23 PM »
Upsampling and oversampling depends on the way the system mathematically "fill in the blanks."

I am more concerned with jitter correction than upsampling (I use a NOS DAC, sounds better than my oversampling CD player).

As in any source of music, the quality of software also affect the playback. Compare and Chesky CD to a Viva CD!

Just my $0.02.

Is your NOS DAC an outboard DAC?  If so, I suggest you compared it with another reputable outboard oversampling DAC.   In general, DACs in CD players, unless they're  from Wadja or Meridian, can't hold a candle with  reputable outboard DACs.